A CIO Blog with a twist; majority of my peer CIOs talk about the challenges they face with vendors, internal customers, Business folks and when things get through the airwaves, the typical response is "Oh I See". Some of you may disagree with my meanderings and that's okay. It's largely experiential and sometimes a lot of questions

Updated every Monday. Views are personal

Monday, April 23, 2012

I don’t know how I stumbled across this
blog and hundreds of comments but it had me thinking with a gaping and wide
open mouth. Not that the scenario I read about does not play itself ever so
often in the corporate circles; it was an open discussion on strategies to
entrap the CIO to meet the next target, to close a deal, to shorten the sales
cycle. There were experiences shared, discussed, fortunately no names mentioned
of the vendors or the CIOs. I did pick up some good recommendations on fine
dining though.

Trappings of power bring with it
responsibility; with large budgets and the ability to decide in favour of one
against the other, the CIO sits in a position where every vendor big or small
attempts to find the winning formula to gain a good book and business. The
exalted chair is expected to make a fair decision (the loser may think
otherwise) to award business to the deserving and not be swayed by the drama or
influenced by ill means. CIOs I know across this globe practice unshakeable
integrity in decision making.

From time immemorial those wielding
financial power have been sought after for favours. In the old days, after the
technical evaluation, the purchase executive could turn down a decision and no
one could challenge that. The power of veto was a feared weapon. Over time
driven by trust and increasing penetration of IT, a shift occurred with the CIO
empowered to work independently. Economic cycles shifted the decision making to
where the monies lie, and the elastic nature swinging it back and forth to
equilibrium quickly.

So as I read through post after post, it
was an uneasy feeling to see tips and trick that have worked to snare a deal.
Golf course priority bookings, tickets to matches, free vacations, gourmet
dining, you name it, they had tried it. Some more than others, they found what
works for whom not leaving many who resisted all temptation. Feeling queasy
about this, I called a few old colleagues to chat and discussing this with them,
one toppled my wine by adding anecdotes of his own.

Are decisions so easily facilitated with
the lineage and vintage of wine determining the steps and time required to
close the deal ? Is this working at the conscious level or the sub-conscious
even when there is no coercion ? Is it wider in its reach and influence than we
believe it to be ? Are we becoming slaves to a system without realizing it ? Or
have we become immune to the system and now factor it in to our decision making
criteria ?

I love my red wine and some good food to go
with it; I have enjoyed many evenings out with friends and family. Occasionally
vendors seek relaxed meetings “outside of workplace”; I know many have been
careful to take a few colleagues along for comfort and keep the meeting a
strict business one. It keeps the discussions easier and the environment
lighter with no obligations being created on either side. A few CIOs also pick
up the tab rather than leave even an iota of doubt. I would assume that each
vendor would have classified data on what works and what does not for every
tagged CIO.

The play now is universal; every vendor
uses some leverage or other to go beyond the normal decision making cycle.
Direct or indirect, these influences are here to stay as long as there are
multiple vendors offering similar solutions or products. Wine and dine is part
of corporate culture, the CIO and for that matter other CXOs have to work the
fine line between undue influence and socially acceptable behaviour keeping
their personal and corporate values above everything else.

Monday, April 16, 2012

My CIO friend was looking glum, really glum
if you know what I mean; and he is not the type who normally gets harried by
issues, always cheerful, and willing to help others. He goes around telling
people about thinking positive and choosing your attitude. It was surprising to
see this side of his demeanour. So I asked him about the root cause of his
worries.

He has always been a proponent of
outsourcing over his illustrious career spanning more than two decades, more
like a trendsetter than a follower. In that he had worked with outsourcing
companies large and small, local and global, structuring large deals that were
acknowledged and appreciated by the companies he worked for as well as the
vendors. When someone needed advice on managing tricky situations or contracts,
he was the person they approached.

Building on an existing contract that did
well he had extended the scope of services and support for a longer tenure.
Considering that the outsourcing vendor had been working with him for a long
time it was seen as a natural and logical extension. There was merit and value
in the deal for both sides. It was like
a no brainer deal. Going into execution he did not foresee any challenges
barring the initial teething troubles when any new service is commissioned.

The slip between the lip and the proverbial
cup or intent to execution started going awry very quickly. Process review and
tool deployment planned, the timelines slid with consistency that was expected
of improvements. Existing services that had been working well for many years
also started deteriorating. Monthly review meetings attended by increasing
levels of management made the right noises but delivery failed to align to
commitments. Whatever happened to ITIL led SLA and global best practice ?

I was surprised to hear of his misery
considering that the relationship with the vendor preceded his arrival into the
company and that successful outsourcing was child play for my CIO friend. Large
deals have a way of coming to life on their own; they do not always follow a
predictable pattern, instead they find their own lowest common denominator in
which they settle down before improvements begin. He acknowledged this
hypothesis and queried how should he respond to adverse business impact or
disruptions to critical business processes ?

This was discussed in the review meetings
and the team said they were committed to making amends. Reality being
different, he was exasperated with selective and partial information sharing.
It is not the way relationships are built and sustained. What causes this gap ?
I do not believe for a moment that there is mal intent present; but how to
bring the train back on track ? Was it about transition from courtship to
marriage predicament where partners take the relationship for granted ? The
nuptial agreement spelt out everything, but … Not wanting to proffer advice to
the wise, I sought his game plan.

Forget the SLA, the contract, that can come
back later; it is people who make things happen. For the situation to change,
the people have to be brought back to the table with a rigour to the review
that sticks accountability to senior leaders and individuals. Review and
monitoring by the day on the plan by everyone and change people if they are
unable to run with the required speed. Keep the pressure up until they deliver
or want out of the relationship. It is critical and important to keep the end
objective in mind, and that is linked to business expectations and
improvements.

Monday, April 09, 2012

We live in a world of information overload,
information thrust at us across all mediums; print, hoardings, building
facades, transport buses, taxis, email, SMS, chat, social media, and now
multiple mobile devices that wake up and stay with us until we go back to
sleep. In bed, while traveling, at work, at home, with friends, in a meeting,
relaxing by the beach, even while in the washroom, we are now connected,
consuming, creating and contributing information to the ever growing heap.

Information overload was a term I heard long
time ago when dial-up internet connectivity was just beginning to get into our
homes. Suddenly the world of information opened up; over the years the quantum
of information just continued to grow exponentially while technology folks
created new terms to encompass the new paradigm. KB to MB took longer than MB
to GB did and GB to TB to PB happened in a jiffy. Suddenly it appeared to be
more than we wanted. Nostalgically, we did enjoy occasional moments of privacy
with sparse cellular coverage, unaffordable handsets and obscenely high
tariffs.

So when along with a few CIOs I met a
learned senior consultant talking about the disruptive nature of technology innovations,
it provoked an interesting debate. He outlined his theory on hyper connected
information overload that every executive faces today. He postulated a world of
hyper mobility where devices connected or disconnected from people receive
information on the go. People consume this information and take decisions that
influence business and personal outcomes. Everyone agreed and sought to look at
the future. The wise man smiled and refrained from making any predictions.

The phenomenon today is driven by multiple
location-aware mobile devices all connected to an ecosystem of corporate data
and applications and personal/business social media interlaced with multiple
apps. Thus corporate decisions are no longer only dependent on transactional or
analysed data within the enterprise. This trend is increasing exponentially
with buzz around Big Data which encompasses all the data. It however does not
factor in the speed at which information is disseminated to the consumer of
information. Are we burning the wires, read wireless, faster than we can
process it ?

I do carry 3 devices (almost) everywhere
with me; my laptop, my tablet and my smartphone. Across these almost all the
information I need on the go is synchronized over the air. They are
interchangeable and yet serve different purposes. From one line responses on
the phone to approvals, dashboards and longer responses on the tablet, the
laptop is still the device for writing posts like this and doing a lot of
figure work with formulas or creating presentations. I know many would jump up
and say all this is doable on the tablet; I personally find it easier on the
laptop.

With divergence being the new convergence,
it is certain that we will continue to waddle between screens; a recent study
talked about multi-taskers using two or three screens connected to the same
desktop computer for enhanced productivity. Really productive ? Velocity of
information will continue to increase and our day will continue to shrink. We
are doing more everyday thanks to technology. Our world is more productive, our
companies more profitable; as individuals we see ourselves evolving faster,
achieving goals quicker than we did even a decade ago. Will we ever stop ? I
don’t know.

What will be the next disruption in this
space ? A connected device to keep us busy while we sleep ?

Monday, April 02, 2012

Over the years CIOs and vendors have worked
to forge relationships that go beyond transactional and contractual
obligations. This decade long trend has strengthened some bonds in such a way
that irrespective of the companies that the CIO or the vendor representative
worked for, they continued to do business over the years. It reflects the adage
that people do business with people.

CIOs in new assignments replace vendors
with their preferred partners from the past based on comfort and the
proposition that they know the people within the company; they are comfortable
with the management hierarchy and the finer nuances of the organization way of
working. However, such changes are occasionally disruptive to the enterprise as
well as the incumbent vendors who may have enjoyed good relationships and
business with the earlier CIO.

An interesting situation played itself when
the sales head of a large hardware vendor (A) moved to their larger competitor
(B); the customer used the solution of vendor A and the CIO was planning an
upgrade or replacement. The sales head had to come back to the CIO to work in
her new avatar with vendor B to sell the competing solution. Earlier as a representative
of vendor A, she had advised him of the demerits of moving to the industry
leader’s solution. The predicament that switched over a weekend close to
signing the deal created some amusing but discomforting moments for both the
CIO and the vendor.

While they enjoyed a great relationship, the
CIO demonstrated maturity with fair evaluation, and technology taking
precedence in the decision making criteria. In the end, the CIO did buy vendor
B solution but with a clear message that the decision was fait accompli before
the movement of the sales head. It was a lesson in humility for her being a
large order for a marquee customer for which she could claim no credit.

In another case I found business to
business connect stronger surviving changes in relationship managers over the
years. The foundation was built on long standing relationship though the
delivery was of acceptable quality. This relationship sustained itself while the
sales team played a facilitating role managing renewal of contract and
extension of service. Why do some relationships survive beyond people or
organizations ? What makes some shift while others stick ? Does one have merits
over the other ? How does the CIO break the chains of inertia or comfort
keeping business interests paramount ?

I believe that relationships sustain
themselves in a symbiotic way when the end result is win-win. When either is in
a position of compromise, survival instincts will drive the path ahead. This
may result in breakdown of existing relationships. Vendors need to keep a watch
in such signs before they reach a breakpoint; go beyond transactions to
engagement. The CIO on his/her part should constantly engage in an open
dialogue with service partners to provide feedback and discuss challenges and
opportunities. It is almost like
managing internal teams.

Coming back to fragility of relationships; a
bird told me about a vendor warning a CIO for publicly
washing dirty linen ! Now that’s a story for another day over a drink.